Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Does no one really read the article? (Score 0) 523

If you read it.. it mentions this little thing called TCO (Total cost of Ownership).. which is not JUST the device (laptop or desktop) or Tech Support its:

Hardware (and the replacement cycle) - Macs tend to be replaced less often
Support - Mac's tend to work.. less options/features but for office workers, they use their 2 - 3 applications + email (most of which these days are more web based), not to mention manufacture support. This is a big number depending on the size of the organization.
Software costs - A lot of full functioning software comes with OSX, vs. quite a lot in the windows world are add-ons (ie: cost)
Backend management costs - This is another big cost, but a LOT of package deployment tools, management/monitoring of the hardware, etc... all these things drive up the TCO.
and a lot of others.. all these variables add up.. and depending on the use case makes a strong argument for OSX. It doesn't work in all cases (hey, you are using a windows only app that is core for your business.. not much you can do other than run Windows.. adding VDI/Virtualization drives up cost/complexity).. But again, if you are deploying VDI enmass, then this can impact the numbers as well (ie: less dependency on the user hardware, which means user satisfaction is more important), especially since tightly controlled (by IT) environments running specific applications tend to be viewed more favorably viewed its just "an app" not their work environment.

In short, its a combination of a LOT of variables that is driving the TCO to favour macs.

Comment Re:Not a surprise (Score 2) 129

Security has always been paid lip service because everyone assumes "it won't happen to me" until it does.. so its very difficult to get a CEO to sign off on a few thousand dollars on something that MAY happen (ironically they will purchase insurance and support contracts under the notion that IF something happens they are covered) Since I work in security and its always an issue.. the world is dangerous and since the laws allow them to, as you said.. "opps", wright off the breach as a loss on the taxes, pass on any costs incurred to the consumer, and keep on moving, there is really no incentive for them to actually DO anything.

Comment Re:If President Obama was really committed ... (Score 1) 49

You do realize that the single biggest complaint people have about the government is "overreach" and "too much government intrusion". So this would just put another nail in the coffin, not to mention the republicans would use it as a cudgel to complain about "the democrats are against the police and due process". Sadly we have a delicate situation that is best left to the courts because anything else is going to get politicized like mad.

Comment Re:"Sharing" (Score 1) 133

And what assurances do you have that the Taxi Driver in the Cab you ordered isn't a serial rapist or murderer, or just plain nuts. At the end of the day you take your chances.. Taxi companies have more incentive to "eliminate" people because they have a limited number of slots with a large number of applicants.. Uber (and other ride sharing apps) don't exactly suffer from saturation of resources.. so their checks are nominal (they do background checks, do they ID verification).. So its quite a bit more secure than a "gypsy cab" but slightly less than a formal taxi company.

My issue with the taxi companies is their refusal to adapt and grow.. Rather than adding support (without massive surcharges) for CCs.. they fight it.. (eliminate cash from the equation and a lot of the taxi assaults and robberies go away. Rather than having a more modern booking system, they still use the old switchboard model.. Rather than using the tracking they already have on some taxis and allow it to be expanded to those requesters.. they close door it. (lets not even get into the Medallion fees, and other items)

But statistically speaking, your chances of running into a murderer driving for uber is the same as running into a murderer as a Bus Driver, or in a Bar. And as a passenger, your position is not "I'm in a taxi, I'm safe".. it should be "I'm in a strangers car, I should be mindful of the driver and my surroundings". Now when robotic (non human) taxis come about, then get cozy.. (I welcome our robotic overlords.. because humans are just problematic) but until that time, stop worrying about a few bad apples when these same bad apples can/do exist in other transportation options (except air).. and I should point out.. MOST of the danger is NOT from the Driver.. its the passengers.. Taxi Driver have the highest murder/death rate of any profession.

Comment Re:Get FOX news' dick out of your mouth, AC. (Score 1) 308

Let’s set the facts straight.

1: A CEO’s role (in a publicly traded firm) is to MAKE MONEY.. Jobs just happen to be incidental to that. (ie: we need to expand, and we can’t automate everything.. or the cost to automate would be too high, so we hire people... but if we can get them cheaper, lets do so.. which includes H1B’s, chopping salaries as much as possible, and in the case of Donald.. constant law suits and stiffing those he has a financial obligation to). The president is beholden to the ENTIRE country.. both the big and the small.. and in some cases, can't just abort/reverse course on the military/economic actions of his predecessors.

I’m not trying to sway anything here, but lets be realistic.. its not like the clock resets when a new president enters the office.. and almost NO president has ever “immediately reversed course” from an action of his predecessor.. most roll with the punches, work around it, or let it expire/laps

2: A CEO has (as much as Labor/OSHA laws and other legal/industry rules allow) total control over the a wide number of factors.. however they seldom have direct control over their customers choosing their business.. they can market/advertise/lobby.. but at the of the day, they are beholden to a customer that can be fickle. The president has, in the actual world, very little power.. he can suggest, propose, pen, even push bills through executive order.. but ultimately its going to come down to the Senate and Congress (and in the case of executive order, Judicial review on even if he CAN do that) So the president in most cases is a figure head.. or the king in chess, the most critical piece, but certainly NOT the most powerful.

Now on to your "sucking up to Terrorist Bill Ayers" comment. Well, that's just not even remotely true and certainly shows a lack of reading/wanting to understand the facts. So I would suggest some homework. Perhaps: and and even

And finally the whole "Jeremiah "God Damn America" Wright", again, I refer you to some homework:,

Comment Re:Liberal echo chamber (Score 2) 308

Oh my goodness.. can people really be this stupid.

No where in the article (I know.. READING THE ARTICLE.. what a concept?) did they say anything about moving "negative" or "critical" comments to the president. They removed "abusive" and "hateful" speech..

There is a difference between someone saying "Your policies are the worst and taking the country into the toilet" vs. "you f**king ni**er c**t, just die why don't you" One is being critical and complaining about the president.. and one is just plain rude and something most sane people would never say to someone's face. You can be negative and critical all day long (which is good when its what you believe) and one is just plain hateful and serves little purpose other than ratcheting up the "meanness" of the country.

Comment Re:Not to diminish the usefulness of the feature (Score 1) 153

Depending on where he is.. and the distance to the hospital.. waiting for an ambulance may be the difference of life and death.. remember, they have to GET you.. load and assess you, and then transport you. Vs.. if you have a vehicle that is quasi-automatic... you can cut at least half of that by heading to the hospital yourself.

I find it amusing that everyone wants to burn Tesla for theoretical problems.. (the hack as an example) but the reality is, NO system is perfect.. and so long as improvements are being made.. its fine.. its listed as a "beta feature that should not be enabled unless you know all the ramifications" after all. I'm not going to entrust my entire life to it.. but turning it on highway driving with minimal obstacles, road condition changes, and people... is perfectly safe.

Now if they said: "Its 100% safe with no possibility of something unexpected happening" then there is news.. but they have never once said that.

Comment Re:What's the big problem? (Score 1) 675

The terminals in the US can support Chip and Pin.. its the cards issued that lack the encryption (ie: no pin to decrypt the contents).. so its essentially replacing a easily copied mag stripe with a more difficult still relatively easy chip tech.. the entire point of the PIN is to encrypt the card contents. It would have made more sense to get everyone on Chip and Pin (hey, you are transitioning anyway.. just bite the bullet and go all the way... but somehow the US still ended up with a crappy system.

Most of the speed issues in the US stem from the card terminals support chip, but they take longer because they first attempt a "decrypt", which fails, then it falls back to clear code.. then you add this that its being processed at the Register, not the Card Reader. the Card reader is quick, but they moved the "processing" into the POS which is slower because its converting it back into the data stream that the old mag stripe had.

In short.. crap or get off the pot.. commit to Chip and Pin or don't.. the half-assed solution is what is pissing off people.

Comment Re: Isn't that Ironic (Score 1, Informative) 46

This is commonly referred to as a test case..

Patents that are recognized in China only.. if they sue T-mobile in the US courts for a patent the US doesn't recognize then it opens the books to tons of other copy-cat law suits over similar things.. (hey.. China has a patent on sneezing.. you can't get it in the US, but we can sue to in the US for using our patent).

Comment Re:Crazy talk (Score 1) 343

I highly doubt they talk to real people.. I think the people they talk with are the ones that reinforce their beliefs, not both sides.. But they don't... its purely a numbers game to them.. ("Lets see, the people that are all in favour for surveillance are also big gun enthusiasts.. and the NRA can fund me (plus those that are wealthy in that same camp".. so I will kis.. errr.. I mean "support their position as it happens to coincide with my beliefs".)

I work in government and I can't tell you the number of times I've spoken with people that have never even READ the bills they "support".

Comment Re:Sigh (Score 1) 519

But that's just the thing.. what he said is not stupid.. At best its poor timing, and at worst, he needed to frame it and put a different spin on it so people understand what he means.

You may not like it, or even agree with it, but I think his point is, not EVERYONE involved and on the mailing list agrees (or condones) the methods used, even if they agree with the sentiment. (for example, I HATE the TSA.. I'm not going to go bomb buildings or even agree those that do, but I agree with the sentiments of those that want to see it dismantled/tossed in the rubbish bin).. Does that mean that if someone DOES do that, I condone it.. of course not. But the problem is, this is a very emotional topic and what everyone seems to want is blood rather than using some clear and rational thinking to figure out how to end this without becoming the enemy (which will NEVER end)

Comment Re:Distraction? (Score 1) 371

How are you arriving at that conclusion..

You must be a manager that believes every second a person is not at their desk hacking a away a problem is "lost productivity"... rather than accepting the notion that sometimes, stepping away from a problem SOLVES the problem..

#1: These women are not just randomly walking around interrupting everyone's day.. they are in the breakrooms and company sponsored events.. (no different than most other companies, other than the fact that, THAT is their job)

#2: It offers the mental break I mentioned, which shows that long term you are MORE productive, because your output is higher quality.

Of course will have some people that abuse it and slack off (like ANYTHING).. you feed them, and some people will spend more time eating than doing work. You give them a bathroom, and some people will spend more time using it than their work.. but the majority see it for what it is.. a tool to help bring LIFE back into the "factory floor" and lets them focus on the job rather than worry about all the other things that we do think about (ie: where to eat, where/if I can poo, and in the case of this example, my life is depressing because I ONLY work)

Again, cracking the whip on everyone is not going to make EVERYONE more productive. And it sounds like for YOU, its a distraction (because you want to view it as such).. And I bet very much you are the sort that can't work at home because of "the distractions".

Slashdot Top Deals

"Confound these ancestors.... They've stolen our best ideas!" - Ben Jonson